[SJAAboard] Toward a Library Model for the Loaner Program

[Rob Hawley (SJAA)]

>Are we once again talking about the alleged lack of storage?
>I think we have the space, you just don't ask to use it.  I
>can store another moderate size scope and have offered to do
>so, but I haven't heard anything more about it.
>

I was initially going to reply to this with a curt "you don't get it" reply.
Since we have greatly reduced the program in the last year this may be a
good time to reexamine the entire model of how the program is run.

CURRENT MODEL - TAG IT'S YOUR PROBLEM

Members are guaranteed use of the scope for 3 months, but are then
encouraged {begged} to keep it until the club needs it. Thus the program
runs more like a game of tag.  We hope the member is willing to keep the
scope, but then we have to track the member's address for years.  We could
also potentially lose scopes unless we proactively contact the members.

Exchanges are also difficult since it requires coordinating the schedules of
an SJAA representative, the previous loanee, and the new loanee.

With an inventory the size of that in early 2007 it was the only model that
could work.

THE JUGGLER MODEL

Some emails to me suggested a model that I will refer to as the juggler
model.  Under this model we would only have enough scopes in the inventory
so they were constantly being exchanged at the end of every loan period.
This would assume there are always pending requests at the end of each loan
period. 

The problem is the demand for any one scope varies over time.  On the
average I except a request for a scope about every 12 to 18 months.  But
that is only an average.  

The Zeider scope (the only one I know the history of) has had four loanees
since 2005.  I kept it about 9 months (3 using, 3 repair, 3 storage). Nelson
kept it about 2 years.  When Steve suddenly returned it we were fortunate to
immediately arraign a new loan.  I just recently lent the scope to the 4th
member. It was also regularly used by all loanees for most of the period
since 2005 which likely can't be said about most of the other scopes.

Using model we would probably end up reducing the program to just two
scopes.  The Intelliscope and the Ultima are on their second loan despite
being in the program for less than six months. Because they have electronics
I expect they will always be the first scopes beginners ask for. I do not
see this approach as viable.



THE LIBRARY MODEL

A Library Model avoids the problems of the previous two.  Members check out
scopes with a return date.  The member is required to either return the
scope on the return date or proactively contact the club to extend the loan.

The problem with the Library Model is that the club has to provide storage
until the next person asks for a scope (just like a library stores the books
currently not on loan).  Now that we have reduced the size of the program
and plan to eliminate some of the scopes with the largest storage impact
{which are the SCTs} then how much storage do we require?

If we stick to exactly to the plan that I presented at the board meeting {my
May 13 message} then I estimate that we would need about 225 square feet of
storage.  My estimates may be optimistic so let's raise that to 300 square
feet.  That would also allow for modest growth.  300 square feet is 15 x 20
feet of flat floor space.  It does not have to be contiguous.

Where can we get 300 sq ft that we can count on with little or no notice? I
have tried getting storage commitments from members.  Either these have
evaporated when I needed them or the members have returned the stored scope
on short notice complicating the problem even further. If Lee is willing to
supply that much storage then we could seriously consider this model.

By using this model the entire process of loans would be easier.  When a
member requested a scope that was in inventory we could simply arraign for
pickup.  At present the requesting member may have to wait up to a month.
Lee might we willing to handle the loans directly to and from his office,
but that is a different discussion.

So after Gary's offer (which I estimate as providing about 9 square feet)
that would leave about 290 square feet that the club would have to have long
term commitments for and rapid access to.  Commercially this will cost about
$300 per month. In practice it will be slightly less since some scopes will
be in loan, but that is the worst case. 

Lee is the only viable approach. Lee would have to decide whether this is a
long-term commitment he is willing to make.



Rob Hawley